Signs of the verbs movement in the Kyrgyz and Russian languages

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Batken State University

Signs of the verbs movement in the Kyrgyz and Russian languages

Kokchoeva S.

Batken, Kyrgyzstan

Abstract

This article discusses the semantics of movement verbs in Kyrgyz and Russian languages in a comparative typological aspect. One of the main lexical-semantic groups of the semantic system of the verb are the verbs of movement. Verbs of movement -- one of the main semantic varieties of the substantive aspect of the verb. They occupy a prominent place in the semantic side of the language. Therefore, the relevance of the study in the multi-structural languages of the semantic system of motion verbs is very rich in meanings and shades of meanings. The basis of the lexical meaning is a concept that, however, is not identical with the meaning. The lexical meanings of words can be close to each other, for example, the verbs of the movement “выйти” -- “go out, go out” and “уйти” -- “go away, go away, go away” and may not have any connections with each other at all, for example, “прийти” -- “come, come” and “спать” -- “sleep”, “идти” -- “walk, go” and “жениться” -- “get married”, “думать” -- “think” such examples are reflected. In addition, it was noted since the lexical meaning consists of two components -- the significative and denotative, they are essentially characteristic of the verbs of movement.

Keywords: verbs of movement, semantics, lexical meaning, comparatively, content.

Аннотация

ЗНАКИ ГЛАГОЛОВ ДВИЖЕНИЯ В КИРГИЗСКОМ И РУССКОМ ЯЗЫКАХ

Кокчоева С. А., Баткенский государственный университет, г. Баткен, Кыргызстан

Рассмотрена семантика глаголов движения в киргизском и русском языках в сравнительно-типологическом аспекте. Одной из основных лексико-семантических групп семантической системы глагола являются глаголы движения. Глаголы движения -- одна из основных семантических разновидностей содержательного аспекта глагола. Они занимают видное место в смысловой стороне языка. Семантическая система глаголов движения очень богата значениями и оттенками значений в разноструктурных языках. В основе лексического значения лежит понятие, которое, однако, не тождественно значению. Лексические значения слов могут быть близки друг другу, например, глаголы движения «чыкмак» -- «выйти, выходить» и «кетмек» -- «уйти, уходить, уезжать» могут и вовсе не иметь друг с другом никаких связей, например, «келмек» -- «прийти, приехать» и «уктамак» -- «спать», «журмек» -- «ходить, идти» и «уйленмек» -- «жениться», «ойломок» -- «думать» подобных примерах отражены. Кроме этого, отмечено поскольку лексическое значение состоит из двух компонентов -- сигнификативного и денотативного, они существенно характерны для глаголов движения.

Ключевые слова: глаголы движения, семантика, лексическое значение, сравнение, содержание.

The verb is one of the complex lexical and grammatical categories of the system of parts of speech. It defines the action or state of the subject in the form of a person and characterizes the relationship, convenience, time and place of the subject and the object of action through its own categories [1, p. 66]. It is the semantic and syntactic center of the sentence and has a wide range of possible combinations, therefore, in the combination of actual verbs, you can see the features of the language, which are the main lexical and semantic group-motor verbs. The semantic system of the verb is the same. Action verbs are one of the main semantic varieties of the content aspect of the verb. They occupy a prominent place on the part of native speakers of the meaning of the language. That is why the semantic system of verbs of movement is very rich in meanings and additional meanings [2, p. 232].

Verbs of action and actions according to their content it is closely related to the verbs of state, one of which is an independent semantic system of the verb. Some independent semantic aspects include: verbs of feelings, verbs of desire, verbs of reception, verbs of attention (attention), verbs of emotional state, verbs of emotional anxiety, verbs of emotional attitude, verbs of thinking (thinking), verbs of knowledge, verbs of memorization, verbs of speech, etc. [3, 6].

Characterization and determination of the features of the movement of verbs in the Russian and Kyrgyz languages, the disclosure of their personalities. To achieve this goal, the methods of conjugate, descriptive-comparative and component analysis were used in the study.

Russian linguists became the methodological basis of the study B. Shcherba, V. V. Vinogradov, B. A. Uspensky, A. V. Ufimtsev; Turkologist-Kyrgyz linguist scientists- N. K. Dmitriev, N. A. Baskov, B. Yunusaliev, I. A. Batmanov, S. Kudaibergenov, B. Oruzbaeva, S. J. Yurta, I. Alaysky District. Usubaliev Zh . Semenova, Z. Chyranov and languages of various grammatical structures were studied from the point of view of interrelation: A. Zhaparov, T. Akhmatov, A. O. Russky, M. J. Tagaev, K. Z. Zulpukarov, K. S. Chonbashov, Z. K. Derbisheva, Z. Karaeva, A. N. Sydykov. The works of the Kambaralievs were used.

In the Kyrgyz language, in addition to the fact that verbs express action, the state of things, the variety of internal connotations of movement is divided into lexico-semantic groups: construction, manufacture, destruction, damage, change in the quality of things, change in state, processes of nutrition, eating, speech, hearing, vision, observation, thinking and verbs, related to psychic feelings [4, p. 377]. verb motion semantic language

In the Kyrgyz language, some scientists, taking into account the breadth of the meaning of action, point to words that actually express movement, the concepts of state and its changes in the form of action.

Verbs of state are connected with time and are designated in the form of movement that occurs in time [5, p. 286] of course, such lexico-semantic words belong to the family of verb words.

In the Kyrgyz language, the meaning of an action is also conveyed through compound verbs meaning lengthening, repetition, completion, beginning and direction of movement. However, not all compound verbs express the peculiarity of passing an action.

In the Kyrgyz language, complex verbs are formed by conjugating verbs that join the participles of a person in the form а,-е,-й,-ып .

In this case, together these two components represent a complex movement.

It follows from this that, taking into account semantic features, verb compound verbs are divided into two:

Lexical compound verbs:

for example, тос-тосуп чык (биреену утурлай чыгуу) to meet (to meet someone);

go-go (go from behind);

sell-buy (sell someone else's thing).

Compound verbs expressing the features of an action:

In this case, auxiliary verbs are used for adverbs: get up, sit down, walk, go, give, take, put, lie down, leave, and so on. B.

Complex verbs expressing the features of the transition of action:

In this case, auxiliary verbs are false for words ending in adverbs: тур, отур, бас, жур, бер, ал, кой, сал, жат, ташта ж. б.

get up, sit down, walk, come on, give, he, put, swim, lie down, throw, etc.

And in the Russian language, verbs were traditionally divided into three classes according to semantics: action verbs, state verbs, process verbs (move, action, state of something).

Verbs can be limited in such a character, but such restrictions are not enough, and that is why the abstraction of the future, This classification does not affect the basic meanings of verbs related to their material nature, namely: the character, semantic structure of the lexemes of verbs, the valence of their semantic potential, syntactic connection, the spread of lexemes in linguistic conditions actualize the semantic character lexico-semantic systems over others and absolutely implement actualization speech [6, p. 149].

If the basis for distinguishing the meanings of verbs by their types are categorical semantic features, the ways of movement of verbs, currently the transfer of verbs characteristic of movement, is an analysis of lexical, own specific meaning, structural not lexical, but grammatical semantics, the level of communication and linguistic means that change and form the specific character of the category of verbs of any language system.

On the complexity of the lexical meaning of the lexemes of verbs, A. A. Ufimtseva notes that the semantic features of the dictionary (individual) meaning of the dictionary lexemes of verbs are significantly complicated, the ways of passing the action, the circumstances of its execution, the nature of the existing types of verb action, modal and expressive layers are indicated.

About the specifics of the lexemes of verbs by Sh. Bally:

“...processes are taken at the same time as ordinary objects, it is inseparable from them. For the next vertical movement, a position will be taken from our side. There is no doubt, however, that the concept of a verb is often very confusing or very complex, which indicates the need to restore it if possible” [7, p. 146].

Thus, the meanings of verb tokens are combined in the pre-implicit segment, with the categorical semantics of natural and socially regular verbs, and through noun tokens the latter participate as a member of the potential syntagm.

By writing the lexical units of the verb in the nominations, their different semantic features are confirmed, different angles of real connections, words, processes, objects and persons denoting the action, as belonging to them, the producer of this movement or by them. Relationships with different perspectives and concepts of communication are expressed by expressive noun and verb lexemes, semantic coherence is established by the system, due to the strength of the minimum verb lexical- noun-motivated syntagms offer relatively relevant features. The words that are implemented semantically limit each other within this minimal syntagm [8, p. 147].

The word and the meaning are organically connected with each other. As Academic Vinogradov noted: "The word and its meaning are in the common people's, national language, connected with the social system for all its internal members" [9, p. 190].

To the extent that the meaning is visualized by reflection, some phenomenon is in itself or a connected reality of a phenomenon that participates in relation to reality in a certain ratio. That's why he always carries with him certain opportunities to "enroll in the subject ranks".

In fact, in practice, when the meaning of a word (related to the subject) is attached to a specific identical object, it is considered a reflection not of the same object, but only of its individual aspects, the meaning of such a word is a general reality. (subject relations).

Action verbs are very complex in their uniqueness grammatical character in the verb system and the semantic character of the lexico-semantic group. The lexico-semantic group of words (verbs) is characterized by the fact that they are represented in two or several words united by their lexical meaning.The basis of the lexical meaning is a concept that, however, is not identical with the meaning. Lexical meanings of words can be close to each other, for example, action verbs “чыкмак”,“выйти, выходить ” - “go out, go out” and “кетмек”, “уйти, уходить, уезжать ” - “go away, "leave " and may not have any connections with each other at all, for example, “келмек” “прийти, приехать ” - “come” and “уктамак”,“спать” - “sleep”, “журмок”“ходить, идти” - `“walk, go” and “уйлонмок”-“жениться”, “get married”“ойломок”,“думать” - “think”. Inaccuracy of lexical meanings between verbs “чыкмак”,“выйти, выходить”- “go out” and “кетмек”,“уйти, уходить, уезжать”- “goaway”,"leave "in given verbs , the first “goout” refers to action verbs,the second refers to the verbs of the state. In the lexical sense, there is a discrepancy between the verbs “журмок”,“ходить, идти” - "walk, go" and “ойломок”,“думать” - “think”: the first is an action verb, the second is a mental verb [10, p. 154].

The lexical meaning and the concept differ from each other, but both belong to the word. The meaning of a word is a historically formed connection between the sound of a word, the representation of an object or phenomenon (designation) that arises in the consciousness of society. As for the concept, we are talking about the subject of meaning, separating from it general and more essential features. This concept refers to humanity as a whole category, although it depends on the level of development of thought. The meaning of a word, on the contrary, is primarily a category of this language, which revolves around its system.

Yu. D. Aprezyan notes in lexical meaning "explains the semantics of the sign, its pragmatic part and modal structure. The lexical meaning of a word is determined by its explanation, which in itself gives a translation of the word in a very specific semantic language" [11, p. 69]. Modal frames (explanations) correspond to the pragmatic elements of signs. They (in a modal framework) reflect an assessment of the situation that speakers or listeners can explain.

The lexical meaning of a word is determined by its non-linguistic true connections. Thus, what matters is at least the relation (relationship) of the sign in our consciousness to them, which is a sign of what it is. There are different types of values: value by signifier and value by value. According to the signification, the meaning is defined as the connection between the phonetic word and the reflection of the subject, performed in practice between the phonetic word and the subject. The signification value is called the signal value, the denotation value is called the denotative value

Just as each lexeme of the system of action verbs is equivalent to their other subsystem, the denotative (nominative, dictionary) meaning differs from the others in relation to their relationship. They can be combined with respect to the signal value, which are common to each token of a certain subsystem.

The signal value does not functionally differ from the lexical meaning, the meaning of the word, the semantics of the word, the definitive terms. The need to use terms arises from comparing the meaning of one word included in one semantic field with one word included in another.

L. N. Novikov stated on the nature of the signifiable meaning, that the signifiable meaning - the meaning of "dictionary" is too common, for example, the meaning of the verb to move from one place to another (explained in dictionaries). In the work of SI Ozhegov "Dictionary of the Russian language" we refer to the explanation of the semantics of verbs:

“идти”- (“баруу, басуу ”- ("to go, to walk") "to walk forward, to walk on one's feet"; "Travel, warm" "transfer" (by train, ice, steamship), "ride" ("travel") "transfer of heat by any means", "warm" (by means of transfer, for example, in a car), "swim" - “swimming” “swimming on a ship or with some floating means”, “moving on the water, in the water (about a ship, about a person)”, “jumping - “ swimming ”- “ slow - balanced warmth ”(swan swims slowly in water) fly, "fly" "warm in the air" (with the help of wings, about birds), "move from one place to another in the air" (now: in space), in a flying machine-plane, rocket, etc. у.с .; Examples: flying an airplane, flying in an airplane, "fast moving, rocketing" (flying a rocket, like an arrow), etc. Where there is a signifiable meaning, there is no need to contrast it with other types of meanings, such as “lexical meaning”, “meaning / word semantics (lexical units)” and so on. In terms of - abbreviated [12, p. 25].

“идти”- (“баруу, басуу ”) "go" - ("go, walk") “go forward, walk with your feet”, “walk, move”

Transfer (on the train, ice, steamboat) “ехать” (“ журуу”) "ride“ ("ride")"move by any means, “жылуу”, “move” (move with the help of something), “ журуу”,“move” move by car, "сузуу" - "to sail"("to swim on a ship or with any kind of swimming equipment”), “суу устунде которулуу” (about a ship, about a man)”, “переплывать - “сузуп етуу”, “swim across”, “float”- “жай - салмактуу жылуу” (slowly-balanced move) f.e.the swan was slowly floating on the water: “лететь-учуу -fly" - "move through the air”(using wings, all about birds),"moving from one place to another in the air”(now: even in space) compare the plane flies,flying by plane ” (go fast,swift)f.e. (The rocket flies like an arrow). There, where there is a meaningful meaning, there is no necessity to contrast it with other types of meanings, such as "lexical meaning", "meaning / semantics of words (lexical units)" and so on. In terms - abbreviated [12, p. 25].

So that, since lexical meaning consists of two components, signifiable and denotative, they are characteristic of significant action verbs. Therefore, the meaning of the denotation reflects a specific object and the phenomena of objective reality, and the signifiable meaning unites a specific, individual (individual reflection) into a general. The formal basis of the meaning of the signifier is the unit of the signifier (signifier unit), "specific words (speech particles) are characterized by concepts between the system of connections" [13, p. 161].

The denotative unit is a segment of information about the external world, the signifiable unit is a segment of information about the world of concepts. Denotative and signifiable units together form a semantic layer of language, which is generally included in the content aspect of language. Denotative and signifiable meanings are also characteristic of the semantic aspect of verbs.

References

1. Mashrabov, A. A. (2015). Basics of comparative grammar of Kyrgyz and Russian languages. Bishkek. (in Kyrgyz).

2. Uspensky, B. A. (1965). Structural typology of languages. Moscow. (in Russian).

3. Vasiliev, L. M. (1981). Semantics of Russian. Moscow, (in Russian).

4. Oruzbaeva, B., Tursunov, A., Sadykov, Zh., Akmataliev, A., Musaev, S., & Sadykov, T. (2009). Modern Kyrgyz literary language. Bishkek. (in Kyrgyz).

5. Kudaibergenov, S., Tursunov, A., & Sadykov, J. (1980). Grammar of the Kyrgyz literary language. Editorial staff: Institute of Language and Literature of the Kyrgyz Academy of Sciences. Science. Frunze. (in Russian).

6. Ufimtseva, A. A. (1974). Types of verbal signs. Moscow. (in Russian).

7. Azizov, A. (1960). Comparative grammar of the Russian and Uzbek languages. Morphology. Tashkent. (in Russian).

8. Azizov, A. (1995). On the problem of comparative study of languages. Problems of development of Turkish languages. Tashkent.

9. Vinogradov, V. V. (1972). Russian language. Grammar study of the word. Second edition. Moscow. (in Russian).

10. Budagov, R. A. (1984). Words, things, concepts, attitudes. Introduction to linguistics. Reader. Minsk. (in Russian).

11. Apresyan, Yu. D. (1974). Lexical semantics. Synonymous means of language. Moscow. (in Russian).

12. Suleimanov, Z. A. (1980). Semantic indivisibility of syntactic constructions in a simple sentence of the Russian and Uzbek languages. Tashkent. (in Russian).

13. Gorodetsky, B. Yu. (1969). To the problem of semantic typology. Moscow. (in Russian).

Список литературы

1. Машрабов А. А. Основы сравнительной грамматики киргизского и русского языков. Бишкек, 2015.

2. Успенский Б. А. Структурная типология языков. М., 1965.

3. Васильев Л. М. Семантика русского языка. М., 1981.

4. Орузбаева Б., Турсунов А., Садыков Ж., Акматалиев А., Мусаев С., Садыков Т Современный киргизский литературный язык. Бишкек, 2009.

5. Кудайбергенов С., Турсунов А., Садыков Д. Грамматика киргизского литературного языка / Институт языка и литературы Киргизской академии наук. Фрунзе: Наука, 1980.

6. Уфимцева А. А. Виды словесных знаков. М.: Наука, 1974.

7. Азизов А. Сравнительная грамматика русского и узбекского языков. Морфология. Ташкент, 1960.

8. Азизов А. К проблеме сравнительного изучения языков. Проблемы развития тюркских языков. Ташкент, 1995.

9. Виноградов В. В. Русский язык. Изучение грамматики слова / Второе издание. М.: Высшая школа, 1972.

10. Будагов Р А. Слова, вещи, понятия, отношения. Введение в языкознание / Хрестоматия. Минск, 1984.

11. Апресян Ю. Д. Лексическая семантика. Синонимические средства языка. М.: Наука, 1974.

12. Сулейманов З. А. Семантическая неделимость синтаксических конструкций в простом предложении русского и узбекского языков. Ташкент: АКД, 1980.

13. Городецкий Б. Ю. К проблеме семантической типологии. М.: МГУ, 1969.

Размещено на Allbest.ru